You just posted on another article: "Right now Acura is as luxurious as Cadillac". Only an ignorant GM hater would say such a thing. This shows that you really aren't neutral enough to credibly call GM "shitty".

Those shitty cars with shitty engineering that killed people were made in 2007. ALL car companies have safety issues and design flaws that can cause injury or death- the only thing GM did wrong in that case was hide it and not recall it.

Sure taxpayers had to pay but was not loosing jobs not just here but around the world worth it. I think it was.

3,500 vehicles in total, which for this segment of vehicles is about 1 day of production. I expect better reporting from Jalopnik.

It's not every vehicle. Only a few thousand select vehicles apply...

Thank you. That makes so much more sense to me now. I was thinking more along the lines of Rose, Blanche, Dorothy, and Sophia.

Yep. The jalopnik coverage of this witch-hunt is pretty much beyond stupid.

I'm assuming jalopnik basically re-posted this because too many engineers where on the original post saying this is a normal and correct way of discussing engineering issues. Sensationalism does nothing for engineers.

Jalopnik writers and a fair number of the readers really need to have the experience of fixing a product design when you have this to go on:

Legal departments frequently tell engineers not to put stuff like that into print. It's pretty common practice for legal to tell an engineer what they can and can not say. The fact that it's all in one document is surprising and not surprising at the same time.

"The scary thought is that these words might have been used to describe a car and now, with the glut of recalls, we have to question if they were ever fixed at all." You're an idiot

Patrick, this is an example of a training and development slide known as "effective communications" that every company worth it's sault will require of it's employees. I do the same training every year. To a certain respect, yes it is a company trying to protect itself from bad press and lawsuits. But it is also…

This is exactly what they were getting at. As an engineer in the automotive world, I can assure people that we don't tell people to not talk about problems, we just ask for a description of the issue instead of just "this is shit."

I see no smoking gun here other than someone pandering for page hits.

I read this the same way you did. Its insider damage control. Find me a large corporate entity that DOESN'T do this.

Yeah -its fun to take this out of context and get yourself in a bunch about, but this is something that could have been created by the HR dept of any major corporation. Its similar to the guidelines you'll see for doing employee performance reviews. The point is to be specific about issues instead of making vague,…

I don't see anything wrong with this. They don't appear to be "muffling" their employees. It looks like they were simply trying to get their people to provide useful information to their engineers instead of hyperbolic terms that would get blown out of proportion should they have reached the mass media.

Uhhhh... there is nothing bad with this. Saying "the car is a deathtrap" does nothing to help remedy the issue. The engineers need to actually hear what is going on, not someone just freaking out. It helps prevent lawsuits too.

I dont think thats exactly the point they are trying to convey if anything they want a specific report of the problem not just some vague generalization. I see where they could be coming from, ya know in order to solve an issue they have to know exactly what that issue is not just oh you know this vehicle is a…